Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: sma2!fred@uunet.UU.NET (Fred Brooks) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Are Warships Over-Manned? Message-ID: <1990Dec3.051253.3484@cbnews.att.com> Date: 3 Dec 90 05:12:53 GMT References: <1990Nov29.004354.21100@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: sma2 Lines: 33 Approved: military@att.att.com From: sma2!fred@uunet.UU.NET (Fred Brooks) In article <1990Nov29.004354.21100@cbnews.att.com> crowl@cs.rochester.edu (Lawrence Crowl) writes: >I cannot see a need for more than 50 men on a ship, unless it carries >aircraft (including helicopters). The jobs I can imagine are: > > commander (whoever is in charge for the shift), helm, > weapons control (2), weapons loading (2), radar/sonar operators (2), > cook, and janitor > you forgot the guys who man the engines(electricity,steam,air air-conditioning,refrigeration,water,main propulision,motors,shipfitters), supply-admin(disbursing,mail,personnel,adp), weapons-operations(gunners,deck, boats,refueling,missiles,small-arms,ew), staff(ok you can cut these people), security-communications (signal, radio),doctors(medical, dental), and more. >Are current ships over-manned? If ships are not over-manned today, can we >reduce the manpower requirements for future warships through automation and >proper systems design? Sure, but most of the ships in the fleet are 15 to 20 years old with plants that run on the edge of explosion to get max power trying to keep up with the gas-turbine,nuke fleet. Most of the people are down below the water line so you don't see them or know they exist until the lights go out. -- Defend your 2nd amendment rights. Fred Brooks Portland Oregon Life is too too short to live in California Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com